Table 4 Qualitatively summarized results, overall rating, and quality of evidence (GRADE) on reliability per instrument
Instrument (reference(s)) | Summarized result on reliability | Overall rating | Quality of evidence | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality level | Reason | |||
ICC range per subscale: 1. Requirements 0.55–0.80, 2. Appeal 0.40–0.56, 3. Openness 0.64–0.71, 4. Divergence 0.48–0.74 | 1, 3, 4: ( ±) 2: ( −) | No grade High | ||
EBPAS-50 [46] | Pearson’s correlation total scale = 0.344. Indeterminate rating (?) since ICC not calculated | (?) | No grade | |
ICC range per subscale: 1. Attitudes: 0.44–0.86, 2. Practice: 0.78–0.84, 3. Knowledge/skills: 0.70–0.86 | 1: ( ±) 2, 3: ( +) | No grade Moderate | − 1 RoB | |
ICC ranged from 0.37 to 0.90 (50% > 0.70). Indeterminate rating (?) since ICC per subscale not reported | (?) | No grade | ||
Bernhardsson [65] | Indeterminate rating (?) since no ICC or Pearson’s or Spearman’s correlations reported | (?) | No grade | |
ICC range per subscale: 1. Decision making = 0.71–0.78, 2. Subjective norm = 0.63–0.86, 3. Attitude = 0.52–0.82, 4. Perceived behavioral control = 0.80–0.83, 5. Intention and behavior = 0.76–0.86 | 1, 4, 5: ( +) 2, 3: ( +) | High Moderate | − 1 Incon | |
ICC range = 0.89–0.92 | ( +) | Moderate | − 1 RoB | |
ICC range per subscale: 1. Value = 0.51–0.57, 2. Knowledge = 0.70–0.88, 3. Implement = 0.63–0.84 | 1: ( −) 2: ( +) 3: ( ±) | High High No grade | ||
ICC range per subscale (five-factor model). 1. Relevance = 0.69–0.94, 2. Terminology = 0.79–0.94, 3. Confidence = 0.76–0.95, 4. Practice = 0.45–0.92, 5. Sympathy = 0.47–0.77 | 1, 4: ( +) 2, 3: ( +) 5: ( ±) | Moderate High No grade | Incon | |
EBP Diermayr [96] | Mean ICC 0.67 (range 0.40–0.89). Indeterminate rating (?) since ICC per subscale not reported | (?) | No grade | |
ICC per subscale (four-factor model): 1. Attitude toward EBP = 0.840, 2. EBP knowledge = 0.966, 3. EBP skills = 0.815, 4. EBP utilization = 0.876 | ( +) | Moderate | − 1 impre | |